Author
Topic: are you happy how predictable everything is in tennis nowadays? (Read 1950 times)

OK, first of all I like all players except some of these youngsters who talk too much. However, even as a Nole fan, I'm getting tired of seeing Nole, Fed, Nadal and Murray winning everything important in tennis.

I was happy when Djokovic lost to Haas in Miami, but Haas didn't win Miami. It was Murray.

My point is, you have these great players who play a couple of amazing matches but at the end it's Nole, Rafa, Fed and Murray winning everything. If it's not one than it's the other. I just wish somebody would shock us. Darn, I need to be entertained.

I really find it boring that same players make big finals everytime. Wimbledon last summer was so refreshing. After RG I felt so bored, I had gotten enough of Rafa-Nole GS finals, it was the first time we had the same finalists in four consecutive slams. But even there, we had Fed and Murrray, so no fresh names. It was Wimbledon '10 when we had somebody outside Big Four in a GS final, Berdych. Tsonga at least was WTF runner-up in 2011.

During Miami, I was thinking something is wrong with tennis when I preferred the Miami QF line-up compared to having top 8 in QFs. Top 8 in QFs should be the dream line-up, but as it happens everytime, it's just so .

Obviously, no. It's completely boring. It's always the same 4 at the SF and probably the same 8 at the QF. JMDP, Tsonga, Berdych and Ferrer are a step below the TOP 4 but ahead of the rest of the field too. None of the youngsters seem to be good enough to cause an upset, and when they're close they choke in the most horrible way (Dimitrov vs Murray and Djokovic). So it does seem that we will have the same players up there for quite some time.

Obviously, no. It's completely boring. It's always the same 4 at the SF and probably the same 8 at the QF. JMDP, Tsonga, Berdych and Ferrer are a step below the TOP 4 but ahead of the rest of the field too. None of the youngsters seem to be good enough to cause an upset, and when they're close they choke in the most horrible way (Dimitrov vs Murray and Djokovic). So it does seem that we will have the same players up there for quite some time.

We have Gulbis trying to change things.Dimitrov I don't think will do much, he needs a few more years.Raonic hasn't progressed, Isner hasn't progressed. Jerzy might have a chance to bring down the best, we will see.

I'm happy with it as long as it's Nadal Predictability doesn't matter one bit to me. I just like seeing the style of tennis I prefer. Nadal has that brand of tennis that I love to watch. And when he faces up against Djokovic, amazing points and ball-striking is to be had. So, the more Nadal v Djoker GS finals, the better in my opinion.

when was the last time tennis was unpredictable? I think its always been the top players winning everything

When thinking of unpredictability I have completely opposite opinion.To me it's not about top dogs winning, its more about how they are winning. If you have Murray vs Ferrer match, their play is totally predictable. Same with Fed vs Nadal. Nadal keeps playing at Fed's backhand with lot of topspin, similar with Murray vs Fed.

Same tactic all over again.

That's why I like strategic variety from my fave players. Sometimes they'll shower opponents with incredible amount of UE's, sometimes they will upset top dogs, sometimes they'll play against the odds and sometimes they will beat world #1 even at almost 35 years of age.All done by the 'unpredictability' of their play.

It's fine, because you have four dominant players, so last year four different slam winners-i think that's pretty good. Far better than the dominance of three, two, or god forbid - one player. I do think another player to make it a 'big five' would be great, Del Potro being the obvious choice, but he has a knack of not living up to our expectations.

« Last Edit: April 07, 2013, 09:37:03 AM by jesse james »

Logged

I am a lighthouse worn by the weather and the wavesAnd though I'm empty I still warn the sailors on their way

when was the last time tennis was unpredictable? I think its always been the top players winning everything

Tennis really is a game where top players will always end up winning titles, lower ranked guys may play some great matches but only top players can play seven in a row. But homogenized surfaces mean you have the same winner candidates on every surface, with more variety in surfaces you can have a RG champ who hardly makes R2 in Wimbledon and vice versa. That would mean more different players in GS SFs/QFs.

I'm happy with it as long as it's Nadal Predictability doesn't matter one bit to me. I just like seeing the style of tennis I prefer. Nadal has that brand of tennis that I love to watch. And when he faces up against Djokovic, amazing points and ball-striking is to be had. So, the more Nadal v Djoker GS finals, the better in my opinion.

I have my tastes on playing styles and I like it when offensive-minded players do well, even on slow surfaces. But, in my opinion same playing style shouldn't be effective on both clay and grass. Nadal last summer was the first player in years who won RG but couldn't make it to semis in Wimbledon. The previous time that happened was Nadal in 2005. And 2004 was the last time when both RG and Wimb. champ couldn't make the SF in the other tournament. Before Federer in 2005, the last time same player win either RG or Wimb. and reached the SF in ther other was Agassi winning RG and being Wimb. runner-up in 1999. And before it, the previous time was 1989 with Becker reaching RG SF and winning Wimbledon.

It's fine, because you have four dominant players, so last year four different slam winners-i think that's pretty good. Far better than the dominance of three, two, or god forbid - one player. I do think another player to make it a 'big five' would be great, Del Potro being the obvious choice, but he has a knack of not living up to our expectations.

Four different slam winners was a good thing. But no other player making final wasn't. And RG '11 - AO '12 was a dark period for me. Tsonga's Wimbledon SF was the only GS SF for players outside the Big Four.

But that has more to do with Nadal adapting his game than it does with slowing the grass down. If you speed up the courts back to how they were before, Nadal would still make it to at least the semis most of the time, in my opinion. He's shown he's now a competitor on fast courts. He won Queen's Club. He won the US. He won Dubai. He's made it deep a few times at the WTF. He is able to beat the best even on really fast courts now that he's become more aggressive. I don't necessarily agree with the homogenization of the surfaces either. I would like to see a faster Wimbledon again, too. However, I don't think it will make much of a difference in this era. Like Alex said, the Big 4 are simply too good. The surface speed won't prevent them from winning.

I think it would be nice to see some people step up and really challenge the top dogs, that's what could make things more exciting. I always like watching players in their prime though like Nole playing such superb tennis and really taking it to the competition.

with 3 all time greats running around did you expect some toothless redneck to make the final or what?

I repeat: you have no less than 3 all time greats playing at the same time:

roger, nadal, and nole.

and murray is pretty damn tough also.

nobody is getting through these 4 unless these 4 are injured.

that said, I think del potro will be the next player to get near the top. he has the tools to challenge some of the top guns. what he is missing is consistency and better fitness which should come sooner or later.